It has been a little over two years since the Supreme Court issued its decision in Bauman v. AG Daimler, and, from our perspective, its impact has been significant, even earth shaking (no pun intended, and we have a San Francisco office and certainly would not make light of earthquakes).  We previously discussed Bauman’s impact on the analysis of personal jurisdiction on several occasions, in the context of notable decisions, good and bad (thank you, California), and in the hotly contested area of consent through registration to do business in a state, here.

Our breaking news is one of the biggest post-Bauman mass tort jurisdictional wins.  The Second Circuit held – in the context of asbestos mass tort litigation – that a company with “continuous and systematic” business in a state (Connecticut) can’t be sued by out-of-state litigation tourist plaintiffs over out-of-state asbestos exposure.   Brown v. Lockheed-Martin Corp., ___ F.3d ___, No. 14‐4083, slip op. (2d Cir. Feb. 18, 2016).  Having a major facility in the jurisdiction, and acquisition of a major in-state operating subsidiary, along with “significant” revenue wasn’t enough for the defendant to be “at home.”  Id. at 18-25.  Compared to the defendant’s total activities, there was nothing “exceptional.”  Id.

Brown is the first appellate post-Bauman decision outright rejecting “jurisdiction by consent” based on mere registration to do business.  The court first construed the Connecticut statute narrowly (rejecting contrary state intermediate appellate precedent) to avoid the statute clashing with Bauman’s constitutional analysis.  Slip op. at  32-41.  Such registration statutes were almost always intended to confer no more than “specific jurisdiction” – allowing state residents to sue registered foreign corporation over their in-state activities.  Id. at 28-31. “Consent” in the context of mandatory registration statutes, “thus always been something of a fiction.”  Id. at 31.

Moreover, jurisdiction by “consent,” if generally conferred by registration to do business/appointment of an agent for service of process, would raise the same constitutional concerns that drove the result in Bauman:

In any event, we can say that the analysis that now governs general jurisdiction over foreign corporations − the Supreme Court’s analysis having moved . . . to the more demanding “essentially at home” test . . . − suggests that federal due process rights likely constrain an interpretation that transforms a run‐of‐the‐mill registration and appointment statute into a corporate “consent” − perhaps unwitting − to the exercise of general jurisdiction by state courts.

Brownslip op. at 42.

[Plaintiff’s] interpretation of Connecticut’s registration statute is expansive.  It proposes that we infer from an ambiguous statute and the mere appointment of an agent for service of process a corporation’s consent to general jurisdiction, creating precisely the result that the Court so roundly rejected in [Bauman]. . . .  If mere registration and the accompanying appointment of an in state agent―without an express consent to general jurisdiction – nonetheless sufficed to confer general jurisdiction by implicit consent, every corporation would be subject to general jurisdiction in every state in which it registered, and Daimler’s ruling would be robbed of meaning by a back‐door thief.

Id. at 47-48 (citations omitted).

Further, too much constitutional jurisdictional water has flown under the judicial bridge for the century-old decision inPennsylvania Fire Insurance Co. v. Gold Issue Mining & Milling Co., 243 U.S. 93 (1917), to support general jurisdiction by consent. Brownslip op. at 42-46.

[W]e believe that the holding in Pennsylvania Firecannot be divorced from the outdated jurisprudential assumptions of its era.  The sweeping interpretation that a state court gave to a routine registration statute and an accompanying power of attorney thatPennsylvania Fire credited as a general “consent” has yielded to the doctrinal refinement reflected in [Bauman] and the Court’s 21st century approach to general and specific jurisdiction.

Id. at 46.

While Brown did not close the door for all consent arguments under all statutes, “at least in cases brought by state residents,” it provides a roadmap for defeating post-Bauman jurisdiction by consent arguments in other states where the registration statute does not conclusively reach that result.

Particularly in light of Brown – but we were obviously working on this anyway − we’ve decided that Bauman is important enough to create a new general jurisdiction cheat sheet.  Our cheat sheets compile, in chronological order, all defense favorable cases on an issue.  No bad cases, because we don’t do the other side’s research for them.

Bauman, of course, held that unless a corporation is incorporated or has its principal place of business in a particular jurisdiction, it’s hard as heck for a non-resident plaintiff (one not injured in that jurisdiction) to sue such a corporation there.  For purposes of this cheat sheet, that means, that unless otherwise indicated, readers may assume these basic facts:  that the defendant is acorporation asserting lack of general jurisdiction based onBauman, and that the defendant was neither incorporated nor with a principal place of business in the state in question.  This cheat sheet deals only with individual states – no issues of nationwide statutory service of process.

To help our readers, we note in each case if it is: (1) a prescription medical product liability case; (2) a product liability case not involving a prescription medical product; or (3) it’s not a product liability case at all.  That last category is the really hard one, since we have to look at cases we don’t normally follow.  As the breaking news part of this post indicates, we are also keeping track of mentioning registration to do business and rejecting claims that so doing creates general jurisdiction by consentdespite Bauman condemning “grasping” and “exorbitant” theories that would impose widespread general jurisdiction.  Hopefully, with Brown, the handwriting is on the wall for such claims, and mass-tort litigation tourism will be constitutionally curtailed once and for all.

This, it is about time to assess the post-Bauman decisions, so without further ado, here is the new scorecard.  We would like to thank Reed Smith’s Kevin Hara for helping to put this together.

  • Daimler AG v. Bauman, 571 U.S. ___, 134 S.Ct. 746 (Jan. 14, 2014) (California) (non-product liability).  Corporation must be “essentially at home” for state to exercise general personal jurisdiction.  That means incorporated or having principal place of business in state.  Wartime move of entire corporate management to state is exceptional case.  Continuous and substantial in-state business activity, including large sales and multiple facilities insufficient.  “Grasping” and “exorbitant” theories creating general jurisdiction is “every” state rejected.  Agency test that would always lead to jurisdiction improper.
  • Cirkles v. Asbestos Corporation Ltd, 2014 WL 9910834 (Ill. Cir. Feb. 13, 2014) (Illinois) (product liability – non drug/device).  Asbestos motion to dismiss granted. Corporation with no in-state assets, employees, or registered agent, cannot be at home.
  • In re Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany, New York, Inc., 745 F.3d 30 (2d Cir. Feb. 7, 2014) (Vermont) (non-product liability).  Mandamus granted reversing denial of motion to dismiss.  Religious non-profit defendant.  A few in-state services by visiting employees, in-state members and contractors insufficient.  No physical presence.
  • Snodgrass v. Berklee College of Music, 559 F. Appx. 541 (7th Cir. March 13, 2014) (Illinois) (non-product liability). Grant of motion to dismiss affirmed.  Educational institution defendants.  Internet website contacts insufficient.
  • Alkanani v. Aegis Defense Services, LLC, 976 F. Supp.2d 13 (D.D.C. March 26, 2014) (District of Columbia) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Website, along with in-state meetings, negotiations, tax returns, employee visits insufficient.
  • Cromeans v. Morgan Keegan & Co., 2014 WL 1375038 (W.D. Mo. April 8, 2014) (Missouri) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  Defendants had no in-state offices, real estate, were not registered to do business, had no address, phone numbers, bank accounts, or employees.
  • Google Inc. v. Rockstar Consortium U.S. LP, 2014 WL 1571807 (N.D. Cal. April 17, 2014) (California) (non-product liability).  Motions to dismiss granted.  Significant, ongoing in-state business including contract negotiations insufficient.
  • HID Global Corporation v. Isonas, Inc., 2014 WL 10988340 (C.D. Cal. April 21, 2014) (California) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Regular in-state purchases insufficient.
  • Rawlins v. Select Specialty Hospital, 2014 WL 1647182 (N.D. Ill. April 23, 2014) (Illinois) (non-product liability). Registration to do business insufficient.  Jurisdictional discovery rejected.
  • Sonera Holding B.V. v. Cukurova Holding A.S., 750 F.3d 221 (2d Cir. April 25, 2014) (New York) (non-product liability).  Denial of motion to dismiss vacated.  No “doing business” test after Bauman.  Merely doing business is not being at home.
  • Eaves v. Pirelli Tire, LLC, 2014 WL 1883791 (D. Kan. May 12, 2014) (Kanas) (product liability – non drug/device). In-state stream-of-commerce product sales insufficient. No in-state presence rendering defendant at home.
  • Brown v. CBS Corp., 19 F. Supp.3d 390 (D. Conn. May 14, 2014) (Connecticut) (product liability – non drug/device). Asbestos motion to dismiss granted.  Defendant’sactivities were a “trivial amount” in comparison to defendant’s total operations.  Corporate registration/agent for service of process insufficient consent to justify jurisdiction after Bauman.  Affirmed 2/19/16 see below.
  • Allstate Insurance Co. v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc., 2014 WL 3615382 (N.D. Ohio July 18, 2014) (Ohio)(product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to transfer granted.  Continuous and substantial in-state business activity insufficient.  No exceptional case.
  • Gliklad v. Bank Hapoalim B.M., 2014 WL 3899209 (N.Y. Sup. Aug. 4, 2014) (New York) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  Rejecting jurisdiction through consent by service on registered agent.
  • In re Plavix Related Cases, 2014 WL 3928240 (Ill. Cir. Aug. 11, 2014) (Illinois) (prescription medical product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  Bauman not limited to foreign defendants.  Continuous and substantial in-state product sales, in-state agent for service of process, and in-state facilities insufficient.  These are typical of any large corporation in any state.  Non-resident plaintiffs cannot assert pendent personal jurisdiction due to presence of in-state plaintiffs.
  • N.A. Water Systems, LLC v. Allstates Worldcargo, Inc., 2014 WL 5022536 (W.D. Pa. Aug 12, 2014) (Pennsylvania) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Emails to in-state persons insufficient. Defendant had no in-state physical presence and is not licensed to do business.
  • World Traveling Fools, LLC v. Diamond Aircraft Industries, Inc., 2014 WL 4102160 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 18, 2014) (Florida) (non-product liability).  Motions to dismiss granted. Activities of in-state subsidiary insufficient.  Stream-of-commerce product sales and occasional in-state trade show visits insufficient.
  • Martinez v. Aero Caribbean, 764 F.3d 1062 (9th Cir. Aug. 21, 2014) (California) (product liability – non drug/device). Grant of motion to dismiss affirmed.  Bauman imposes “demanding” standard.  In-state service on corporate officer insufficient.  Insufficient contacts to be at home.
  • Chambers v. Weinstein, 2014 WL 4276910, 997 N.Y.S.2d 668 (table) (N.Y. Sup. Aug. 22, 2014) (New York) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Severance granted.  No jurisdiction on the basis of consent by registration of agent in-state.
  • Loyalty Conversion Systems Corp. v. American Airlines, Inc., 66 F. Supp.3d 795 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 2, 2014) (Texas) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state sales, customer correspondence, no matter what volume, insufficient.
  • United States ex rel. Imco General Construction, Inc. v. Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania, 2014 WL 4364854 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 3, 2014) (Washington) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Having long-standing registered agent did not make defendant at home.
  • Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Ricoh Co., 67 F. Supp. 3d 656 (D. Del. Sept. 12, 2014) (Delaware) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Stream-of-commerce product sales insufficient.  No physical in-state presence or registered agents.
  • Grandstaff v. Hiner Equipment, L.L.C., 2014 WL 5471722 (S.D. Iowa Sept. 16, 2014) (Iowa) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Defendant hadno registered agent, no in-state offices, property, or sales representatives, and was not authorized to do business.
  • Gucci America, Inc. v. Weixing Li, 768 F.3d 122 (2d Cir. Sept. 17, 2014) (New York) (non-product liability).  Denial of motion to dismiss reversed.  Nonparty not shown to have sufficient contacts to be at home under Bauman. Court could consider specific jurisdiction on remand.
  • Thompson v. Mission Essential Personnel, LLC, 2014 WL 4745947 (M.D.N.C. Sept. 23, 2014) (North Carolina) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss and transfer granted. Defendant’s contacts, “considered as part of the whole picture,” insufficient to be at home.
  • Monkton Insurance Services, Ltd v. Ritter, 768 F.3d 429 (5th Cir. Sept. 26, 2014) (Texas) (non-product liability). Grant of motion to dismiss affirmed.  General jurisdiction after Bauman is “incredibly difficult.”  Interactive website at most showed doing business, not being at home.
  • Tansey v. Cochlear Ltd, 2014 WL 4829453 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 26, 2014) (New York) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Contacts of New York subsidiary and defendant’s website insufficient to make defendant at home.
  • Parlant Technology v. Board of Education, 2014 WL 4851881 (D. Utah Sept. 29, 2014) (Utah) (non-product liability).  Governmental entity defendant.  Motion to dismiss and transfer granted.  Defendant not authorized to do business, and had no offices, schools, facilities, or employees.
  • Interocean Trade & Transportation, Inc. v. Shanghai AnTong Int’l Freight Agency Co., 2014 WL 4983493 (W.D. Mo. Oct. 4, 2014) (Missouri) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Defendant had no in-state presence. Jurisdictional basis was “woefully insufficient.”
  • Freedom Innovations, LLC v. Charles A. Blatchford & Sons, Ltd, 2014 WL 5286522 (D. Nev. Oct. 15, 2014) (Nevada) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted. Defendant not registered to do business. Defendant’s subsidiary was not at home.
  • Collier v. Land & Sea Restaurant Co., LLC, 2014 WL 5254916 (W.D. Va. Oct. 15, 2014) (Virginia) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted. Website and product sales and product sales insufficient where defendant had no offices or “other strong connections.”  No exceptional case.
  • In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, 2014 WL 5394310 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 23, 2014) (Virgin Islands) (product liability – non drug/device).  Multiple motions to dismiss granted.  Even direct contacts showing an asbestos defendant’s “substantial, continuous, and systematic” course of business insufficient under Bauman.
  • Best Little Promohouse in Texas LLC, v. Yankee Pennysaver, Inc., 2014 WL 5431630 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 27, 2014) (Texas) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  No “continuous and systematic” contacts.
  • Sullivan v. Sony Music Entertainment, 2014 WL 5473142 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 29, 2014) (Illinois) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  Partnership defendant. Partners lacked systematic contacts enough to render partnership at home.  Defendant had no offices or facilities.  Registration to do business and having agent for service of process is not consent to general jurisdiction.
  • AstraZeneca AB v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 72 F. Supp.3d 549 (D. Del. Nov. 5, 2014), certified for interlocutory appeal on other issue, 2014 WL 7533913 (D. Del. Dec. 17, 2014) (Delaware) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss granted in part.  No general jurisdiction through consent by registration to do business.  Denying motion to dismiss on specific jurisdiction.
  • Locke v. Ethicon, Inc., 58 F. Supp.3d 757 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 10, 2014) (Texas) (prescription medical product liability). Motion to remand denied.  Multi-plaintiff complaint.  Out-of-state plaintiffs lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant under Bauman.  Dismissals maintained diversity as to remaining plaintiffs.  Appeal pending.
  • Lembert-Melendez v. CL Medical, Inc., 2014 WL 5881052 (D.N.J. Nov. 10, 2014) (New Jersey) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to transfer granted.  Online product sales insufficient.  Presence at national conferences attended by in-state potential customers and two in-state sales reps handling other products insufficient.
  • C.A., Inc., v. Stonebranch, Inc., 2014 WL 6460818 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 17, 2014) (New York) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  “Solicitation-plus” test involving defendant’s in-state revenue insufficient for general jurisdiction.
  • McMahan v. Rheem Manufacturing Co., 2014 WL 7777007 (Minn. Dist. Nov. 17, 2014) (Minnesota) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state product sales through distributors and activities of in-state subsidiary insufficient.  No in-state physical presence.
  • NExTT Solutions, LLC v. XOS Technologies, Inc., 71 F. Supp.3d 857 (N.D. Ind. Nov. 25, 2014) (Indiana) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted. Longstanding, big $$$ in-state customer relations insufficient.
  • Shrum v. Big Lots Stores, Inc., 2014 WL 6888446 (C.D. Ill. Dec. 8, 2014) (Illinois) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  No general jurisdiction by consent for having registration and agent for service of process.
  • Healthspot, Inc. v. Computerized Screening, Inc., 66 F. Supp.3d 962 (N.D. Ohio Dec. 8, 2014) (Ohio) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  No exceptional case.
  • Gutierrez v. North American Cerruti Corp., 2014 WL 6969579 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 9, 2014) (Pennsylvania) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted. Continuing in-state product sales and service insufficient. No in-state physical presence or registration to do business.
  • U, Inc. v. ShipMate, Inc., 2014 WL 6997538 (D. Kan. Dec. 10, 2014) (Kansas) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Defendant had no offices, production facilities, retail locations, nor a registered agent.
  • Magdalena v. Lins, 999 N.Y.S.2d 44 (N.Y.A.D. Dec. 16, 2014) (New York) (non-product liability).  Denial of motion to dismiss reversed.  General jurisdiction not provided by forum selection clause or consent by registration to do business.
  • Evans v. Johnson & Johnson, 2014 WL 7342404 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 23, 2014) (Texas) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to remand denied.  Multi-plaintiff complaint.  Out-of-state plaintiffs lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant under Bauman.  Dismissals maintained diversity as to remaining plaintiffs.  Selling products, hiring and training sales representatives, training physicians to use the products, and maintaining marketing websites insufficient.
  • Smith v. Union Carbide Corp., 2015 WL 191118 (Mo. Cir. St. Louis City Jan. 12, 2015) (Missouri) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Asbestos defendant’s registration to do business and agent for service of process insufficient to create general jurisdiction by consent.
  • Sioux Pharm, Inc. v. Summit Nutritionals International, Inc., 859 N.W.2d 182 (Iowa Jan. 30, 2015) (Iowa) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss denied in part. Erroneous statement on defendant’s website that it had an in-state manufacturing facility when in fact it did not insufficient.  General jurisdiction may not be based purely on internet activity.  Large contract with in-state supplier insufficient.  Specific jurisdiction allowed.
  • Fulbright & Jaworski v. Eighth Judicial District Court, 342 P.3d 997 (Nev. Feb. 5, 2015) (Nevada) (non-product liability).  Denial of motion to dismiss reversed.  Law partnership defendant.  In-state registration as lobbyist and pro hac vice appearances by partners insufficient.
  • Chatwal Hotels & Resorts LLC v. Dollywood Co., 90 F. Supp.3d 97 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 6, 2015) (New York) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted in part and denied in part.  No in-state physical presence or bank accounts.  In-state revenue, customers, and tax returns insufficient.  Rejecting consent by registering to do business.
  • Farber v. Tennant Truck Lines, Inc., 84 F. Supp.3d 421 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 9, 2015) (Pennsylvania) (non-product liability).  Motion to transfer granted.  Regular in-state business, revenue employees, taxes, travel, and purchases insufficient.  No in-state facilities or agent for service of process.  Unadorned continuous and substantial in-state activity test is no more.
  • Weisblum v. Prophase Labs, Inc., 88 F. Supp.3d 283 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 20, 2015) (New York) (product liability – OTC drug).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Continuous and substantial in-state marketing insufficient.  No in-state physical presence.  Jurisdictional discovery denied.
  • Denton v. Air & Liquid Systems Corps., 2015 WL 682158 (S.D. Ill. Feb. 20, 2015) (Illinois) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Asbestos defendant’s having several in-state facilities insufficient. “Mere presence” of the defendant in state insufficient.
  • Tafaro v. Innovative Discovery, LLC, 89 F. Supp.3d 867 (E.D. La. Feb. 24, 2015) (Louisiana) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Defendant had no in-state property, was not licensed to do business, did not pay taxes, or have a registered agent.
  • Allianz Global Corp. & Specialty Marine Insurance Co. v. Watts Regulator Co., 92 F. Supp.3d 910 (S.D. Iowa Feb. 25, 2015) (Iowa) (product liability – non drug/device). Motion to dismiss denied in part).  Stream-of-commerce in-state distribution of products insufficient. No in-state physical presence or agent for service of process.  Specific jurisdiction allowed.
  • Stroud v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 91 F. Supp.3d 381 (E.D.N.Y. March 10, 2015) (New York) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motions to dismiss granted.  Mere in-state “doing business” no longer sufficient.  In-state manufacturing facility insufficient.  In-state sales outlets insufficient.
  • Jones v. ITT Sytems Div., 595 F. Appx. 662 (8th Cir. March 13, 2015) (Missouri) (non-product liability).  Affirming grant of motion to dismiss.  Defendant had no continuous and systematic relations as to be at home.
  • Haskett v. Continental Land Resources, LLC, 2015 WL 1419731 (S.D. Tex. March 27, 2015) (Texas) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Rejecting argument that “registering as a foreign entity in a state [and] nominating a registered agent” establishes defendant is at home in a forum.
  • Neeley v. Wyeth LLC, 2015 WL 1456984 (E.D. Mo. March 30, 2015) (Missouri) (prescription medical product liability).  Granting reconsideration of motion to dismiss, and transferring action.  Registration to do business and having a registered agent insufficient.
  • Senju Pharmaceutical Co. v. Metrics, Inc., 96 F. Supp.3d 428 (D.N.J. March 31, 2015) (New Jersey) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state office address, prior in-state litigation, and in-state supplier insufficient. Allowing limited specific jurisdictional discovery.
  • Seymour v. Johnson & Johnson, 2015 WL 1565657 (S.D.W. Va. April 8, 2015) (Texas) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to remand denied.  Multi-plaintiff complaint.  Out-of-state plaintiffs lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant under Bauman.  Extensive product sales, in-state employees, including physician consultants, in-state marketing, in-state offices, and payment of salaries, and websites insufficient.  Dismissals maintained diversity as to remaining plaintiffs.  No evidence of key business decisions being made in state.
  • Kraft v. Johnson & Johnson, 2015 WL 1546814 (S.D.W. Va. April 8, 2015) (Texas) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to remand denied.  Multi-plaintiff complaint.  Out-of-state plaintiffs lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant under Bauman.  Extensive product sales, in-state employees, including physician consultants, in-state marketing, in-state offices, and payment of salaries, and websites insufficient.  Dismissals maintained diversity as to remaining plaintiffs.  No evidence of key business decisions being made in state.
  • Huston v. Johnson & Johnson, 2015 WL 1565648 (S.D.W. Va. April 8, 2015) (Texas) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to remand denied.  Multi-plaintiff complaint.  Out-of-state plaintiffs lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant under Bauman.  Extensive product sales, in-state employees, including physician consultants, in-state marketing, in-state offices, and payment of salaries, and websites insufficient.  Dismissals maintained diversity as to remaining plaintiffs.  No evidence of key business decisions being made in state.
  • Whitener v. PLIVA, Inc., 606 F. Appx. 762 (5th Cir. April 9, 2015) (Louisiana) (prescription medical product liability). Grant of motion to dismiss affirmed.  No  exceptional case.  Proper to deny jurisdictional discovery.
  • Benitez v. JMC Recycling Systems, Ltd, 97 F. Supp.3d 576 (D.N.J. April 10, 2015) (New Jersey) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  No in-state presence.
  • Stanford v. DS Corp., 2015 WL 1623895 (W.D. La. April 10, 2015) (Louisiana) (non-product liability).  Multiple motions to dismiss granted.   None of the defendants were at home.
  • Evans v. Johnson & Johnson, 2015 WL 1650402 (S.D. W.Va. April 14, 2015) (Texas) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to remand denied.  Multi-plaintiff complaint.  Out-of-state plaintiffs lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant under Bauman.  Extensive product sales, in-state employees, including physician consultants, in-state marketing, in-state offices, and payment of salaries, and websites insufficient.  Dismissals maintained diversity as to remaining plaintiffs.  No evidence of key business decisions being made in state.
  • Kipp v. Ski Enterprise Corp., 783 F.3d 695 (7th Cir. 2015) (Illinois) (non-product liability).  Grant of motion to dismiss affirmed.  Bauman “raised the bar” on general jurisdiction.  In-state trade show attendance and successful advertising targeting in-state residents and generating many in-state customers and significant revenue is “nowhere close” to sufficient.  Website insufficient to establish general jurisdiction.  No in-state physical presence or registration to do business.
  • Andrews v. Mazda Motor Corp., 2015 WL 1851159 (N.D. Ga. April 22, 2015) (Georgia) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Actions of subsidiaries insufficient.  Transfer denied.
  • Carpenter v. Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., 101 F. Supp.3d 911 (C.D. Cal. April 27, 2015) (California) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motions to dismiss granted.  No in-state presence.  No exceptional case.
  • Carlisle v. USPLabs, LLC, 2015 WL 1966704 (D. Haw. April 30, 2015) (Hawaii) (product liability – non drug/device). Motion to dismiss granted.  No physical presence.  Stream-of-commerce sales through distributors insufficient.
  • Fiduciary Network, LLC v. Buehler, 2015 WL 2165953 (N.D. Tex. May 8, 2015) (Texas) (non-product liability).  Motion to remand denied.  Rejecting general jurisdiction by consent through “registration of an agent for process and registration to do business.”  Allowing jurisdictional discovery on alter ego theory.
  • D & R Global Selections, S.L. v. Pineiro, 9 N.Y.S.3d 234 (N.Y.A.D. May 14, 2015) (New York) (non-product liability).  Denial of summary judgment reversed. Defendant corporation not at home.  Solicitation insufficient.
  • Presby Patent Trust v. Infiltrator Systems, Inc., 2015 WL 3506517 (D.N.H. June 3, 2015) (New Hampshire) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state sales representatives, product sales and service, and tradeshow attendance insufficient.
  • Looney v. SpeeDee Worldwide Corp., 2015 WL 3505711 (D. Conn. June 3, 2015) (Connecticut) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  No physical presence or registration to do business.  Ongoing product sales insufficient.
  • Carmouche v. Tamborlee Management789 F.3d 1201 (11th Cir. June 15, 2015) (Florida) (non-product liability). Grant of motion to dismiss affirmed.  In-state bank accounts, addresses, insurance, financial filing, and prior litigation insufficient.  No exceptional case.  No jurisdiction under forum selection clause.
  • Keeley v. Pfizer Inc., 2015 WL 3999488 (E.D. Mo. July 1, 2015) (Missouri) (prescription medical product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  Marketing and selling drugs in state insufficient.  No exceptional case.  No consent to general jurisdiction by registration to do business.
  • Brady v. Southwest Airlines Co., 2015 WL 4074112 (D. Nev. July 6, 2015) (Nevada) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Stream-of-commerce in-state presence of defendant’s products insufficient.  Jurisdictional discovery denied.
  • Patterson v. Blue Offshore BV, 2015 WL 4096581 (E.D. La. July 6, 2015), appeal pending (Louisiana) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted. Secondments, meetings, prior litigation involvement, and market share insufficient.  No exceptional case.
  • Xilinx, Inc. v. Papst Licensing GMBH & Co.KG, 113 F. Supp.3d 1027 (N.D. Cal. July 7, 2015) (California) ) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state business targeting state, and extensive in-state litigation involvement insufficient.  Jurisdictional discovery rejected. Transfer rejected.  Appeal pending.
  • Ranza v. Nike, Inc., 793 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. July 16, 2015) (Oregon) (non-product liability).  Grant of motion to dismiss affirmed.  Bauman imposes “exacting” jurisdictional standard.  In-state sales, business activity, employees and travel insufficient.  Agency test improper. Alter ego not proved.
  • SPV OSUS Ltd. v. UBS AG 114 F. Supp.3d 161 (S.D.N.Y. July 20, 2015) (New York) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Doing business through local branch office, having registered agent, and prior litigation insufficient.  No exceptional case.
  • Jacobs v. Halper, 116 F. Supp.3d 469 (E.D. Pa. July 22, 2015) (Pennsylvania) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Interactive websites insufficient to be at home.
  • In re Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation, 2015 WL 4508938 (E.D. Mich. July 24, 2015) (Michigan) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Acts of subsidiary not enough.  Alter ego not  proven.
  • Williams v. MD Helicopters, Inc., 2015 WL 4546770 (E.D. Mich. July 28, 2015) (Michigan) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motions to dismiss granted.  In-state product sales and business activity insufficient.
  • Public Impact, LLC v. Boston Consulting Group, Inc., ___ F. Supp.3d ___, 2015 WL 4622028 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 3, 2015) (North Carolina) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Rejecting jurisdiction by consent by registration to do business.
  • In re Libor-Based Financial Instruments Antitrust Litigation, 2015 WL 4634541 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2015) (New York and Virginia) (non-product liability).  Motions to dismiss granted in part and denied in part.  Magnitude of defendants’ continuous and substantial  in-state commercial activities insufficient.  No exceptional circumstances.
  • Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Zydus Noveltech Inc., 2015 WL 4720578 (D. Del. Aug. 7, 2015) (Delaware) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Defendant lacks any physical presence and did not register to do business in-state.
  • Seedman v. Cochlear Americas, 2015 WL 4768239 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 10, 2015) (California) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to dismiss stayed for jurisdictional discovery on specific jurisdiction.  General jurisdiction not established by alter ego theory.
  • Torres v. Johnson & Johnson, 2015 WL 4888749 (S.D.W. Va. Aug. 17, 2015) (New Mexico) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to remand denied.  Multi-plaintiff complaint.  Out-of-state plaintiffs lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant under Bauman.  Bald allegations of conduct of substantial business insufficient. Dismissals and severance maintained diversity as to remaining plaintiffs.  Jurisdiction by in-state plaintiffs, does not create jurisdiction for other plaintiffs.
  • Bragg v. Johnson & Johnson, 2015 WL 4889308 (S.D.W. Va. Aug. 17, 2015) (Texas) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to remand denied.  Multi-plaintiff complaint.  Out-of-state plaintiffs lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant under Bauman.  Volume of in-state sales, in-state hiring and training employees and physician consultants, marketing, maintenance of company files, payment of salaries, and website insufficient. Dismissals and severance maintained diversity as to remaining plaintiffs.
  • Mullen v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., ___ F. Supp.3d ___, 2015 WL 5882057 (S.D. Miss. Aug. 17, 2015) (Mississippi) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state facilities, conducted business, and registered agent for service insufficient.  Acts of agents and subsidiaries not imputed.  No exceptional circumstances.
  • On Your Own LLC v. Meredith Corp., 2015 WL 4937970 (D. Nev. Aug. 19, 2015) (Nevada) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state circulation of magazine and website “nowhere near sufficient” to be at home.
  • Quilala v. Sun Power, 2015 WL 4986012 (D. Haw. Aug. 20, 2015) (Hawaii) (non-product liability).  Multiple motions to dismiss and transfer granted.  “Occasional” in-state business insufficient.
  • McCourt v. A.O. Smith Water Products Co., 2015 WL 4997403 (D.N.J. Aug. 20, 2015) (New Jersey) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted. Asbestos defendant’s large in-state contract, leased offices, employees, and prior litigation “do not come close.”  No consent to jurisdiction by registering to do business.
  • Fabara v. GoFit, LLC, 308 F.R.D. 380 (D.N.M. Aug. 20, 2015) (New Mexico) (product liability – non drug/device). Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state product sales and website insufficient.  No in-state physical presence.
  • Fowler v. C3 Racing, 2015 WL 5009233 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 21, 2015) (Texas) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state advertising, customers, and limited product sales insufficient.  No physical presence and no agent for service of process.
  • BG Products, Inc. v. Stinger Chemical, LLC, 2015 WL 5029635 (D. Kan. Aug. 25, 2015) (Kansas) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Defendant  had no in-state physical presence or direct product sales or advertising.
  • Norex Petroleum Ltd. v. Blavatnik, 2015 WL 5057693 (N.Y. Sup. Aug. 25, 2015) (New York) (non-product liability). Motions to dismiss granted.  In-state activities of subsidiary insufficient.  Bauman “brought an end to ‘doing business’ jurisdiction.”
  • Pitts v. Ford Motor Co., ___ F. Supp.3d ___, 2015 WL 5256838 (S.D. Miss. Aug. 26, 2015) (Mississippi) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted. In-state registration to do business, product sales, contracts, dealers, advertising, and agent for service of process insufficient.  Not registered to do business. Minimal in-state customers.
  • Allegiant Marketing Group, Inc. v. Direct Innovations, LLC, 2015 WL 5038041 (W.D. Okla. Aug. 26, 2015) (Oklahoma) (non-product liability).  Motions to dismiss granted.  No in-state offices, employees, travel advertising or marketing. Forum selection clause insufficient.  Jurisdictional discovery denied.
  • Control Solutions, Inc. v. MicroDAQ.com, Inc., ___ F. Supp.3d ___, 2015 WL 5092593 (D. Or. Aug. 26, 2015) (Oregon) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state sales, and website “patently insufficient.”
  • Cortlandt Street Recovery Corp. v. Deutsche Bank AG, London Branch, 2015 WL 5091170 (S.D.N.Y Aug. 28, 2015) (New York) (non-product liability).  Significant in-state regional operations and office insufficient.  Merely “doing business” in state insufficient.
  • Pathfinder Software, LLC v. Core Cashless, LLC, ___ F. Supp.3d ___, 2015 WL 5093284 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 28, 2015 (North Carolina) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  No “exceptional” circumstances.
  • Family Wireless #1, LLC v. Auto. Technologies, Inc., 2015 WL 5142350 (E.D. Mich. Sept. 1, 2015) (Michigan) (non-product liability).  Multi-plaintiff complaint.  Motion to transfer granted. Registration to do business, and in-state contracts, agents, and product sales “far from sufficient.” However, since some plaintiffs are in-state, matter will be transferred rather than dismissed.
  • Clarke v. Pfizer Inc., 2015 WL 5243876 (E.D. Mo. Sept. 8, 2015) (Missouri) (prescription medical product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state product marketing and regularly conducted in-state business insufficient.  Not exceptional case.
  • Everett v. BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co KG, 2015 WL 5254555 (E.D. Wis. Sept. 9, 2015) (Wisconsin) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motions to dismiss granted. Indirect product sales by defendants with no in-state presence insufficient.  Reconsideration denied, 2016 WL 297464 (E.D. Wis. Jan. 20, 2016).  In-state facility insufficient.
  • First Metro. Church of Houston v. Genesis Group, 616 F. Appx. 148, 149 (5th Cir. Sept. 17, 2015) (Texas) (non-product liability).  Grant of motion to dismiss affirmed. Interactive website and in-state residents as references insufficient.
  • Freedman v. Suntrust Banks, Inc., ___ F. Supp.3d ___, 2015 WL 5579559 (D.D.C. Sept. 21, 2015) (District of Columbia) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss and transfer granted.  In-state offices, loan originations, registration to do business and agent for service of process insufficient.  Rejecting jurisdictional discovery.
  • Callum v. CVS Health Corp., 2015 WL 5782077 (D.S.C. Sept. 29, 2015) (South Carolina) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  Holding company has no in-state contacts.
  • Barron v. Pfizer, Inc., 2015 WL 5829867 (E.D. Mo. Oct. 6, 2015) (Missouri) (prescription medical product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state product marketing and regularly conducted in-state business insufficient.  Not exceptional case.
  • Imax Corp. v. The Essel Group, 2015 WL 6087606 (N.Y. Sup. Oct. 9, 2015) (New York) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  Rejecting alter ego and jurisdiction by consent through registration to do business.
  • Nicholson v. E-Telequote Insurance, Inc., 2015 WL 5950659 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 13, 2015) (Illinois) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state income and business representing 10% to 50% of total revenue insufficient.
  • Teva Pharmaceutical Industries v. Ruiz, ___ So.3d___, 2015 WL 6087198 (Fla. App. Oct. 16, 2015) (Florida) (prescription medical product liability).  Denial of motion to dismiss reversed.  No facts suggest extraordinary circumstances.
  • Schoenberg v. General Motors, LLC, 2015 WL 6159426 (Pa. C.P. Oct. 16, 2015) (Pennsylvania) (product liability – non drug/device).  Preliminary objections to jurisdiction sustained.  In-state product sales, including indirectly through stream-of-commerce insufficient.  In-state purchases insufficient.  No in-state physical presence.
  • Gordet v. Chryslergroup LLC, 2015 WL 6407959 (D.N.J. Oct. 21, 2015) (New Jersey) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss mooted by grant of transfer.  Occasional product sales to in-state customers insufficient.
  • Barite Partners LLC v. Stefan, 2015 WL 6776450 (Minn. Dist. Oct. 30, 2015) (Minnesota) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state advertisements and solicitation insufficient.  Defendant lacked any physical presence.  Not registered to do business.
  • Techmanski v. Quanta Field Service, LLC, 2015 WL 7005617 (D. Mont. Nov. 2, 2015) (Montana) (non-product liability)  Motions to dismiss and transfer granted. Defendants not registered to do business.  Defendants lack in-state physical presence.
  • Johnson v. Carmouche, 2015 WL 6757537 (D. Nev. Nov. 4, 2015) (Nevada) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Single isolated contact cannot make defendant at home.  No physical presence.  No registration to do business.
  • ETS-Lindgren, Inc. v. MVG, Inc., 2015 WL 6756186 (W.D. Tex. Nov. 4, 2015) (Texas) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Defendant had no in-state physical presence.  Jurisdictional discovery rejected.
  • Red Rocks Resources L.L.C. v. Trident Steel Corp., 2015 WL 6873615 (W.D. Okla. Nov. 9, 2015) (Oklahoma) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state product sales, customers, and solicitation insufficient.  No in-state physical presence.
  • Erdman v. Union Pacific Railroad, 2015 WL 7069659 (D.N.J. Nov. 13, 2015) (New Jersey) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state presence of defendant’s rolling stock insufficient.  No other physical presence.
  • Merryman v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 2015 WL 7308666 (W.D. Ark. Nov. 19, 2015) (Arkansas) (non-product liability).  Motions to dismiss granted.  Substantial in-state business and interactive websites insufficient. Registered agent for service of process insufficient.
  • Crussiah v. Inova Health System, 2015 WL 7294368 (D. Md. Nov. 19, 2015) (Maryland) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss granted in part and denied in part.  In-state advertising, providing health services, and employment of residents insufficient.  Specific jurisdiction existed.
  • ADT LLC, v. Capital Connect, Inc., 2015 WL 7352199 (N.D. Tex. Nov. 20, 2015) (Texas) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Doing business in a state is insufficient.  No physical presence.  Forum selection clause insufficient.
  • Handshoe v. Yount2015 WL 7572344 (S.D. Miss Nov. 24, 2015) (Mississippi) (non-product liability).  Non-profit corporate defendant.  Registering with state and appointing agent for service of process insufficient.
  • Cahen v. Toyota Motor Corp., ___ F. Supp.3d ___, 2015 WL 7566806 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 25, 2015) (California) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Extensive in-state product sales, with in-state facilities insufficient. No exceptional circumstances.
  • Johnson v. Kushnir2015 WL 8732259 (Mag. W.D. Mich. Dec. 4, 2015) (Michigan) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Law partnership defendant.  A few in-state clients and one attorney licensed by the state insufficient.  No physical presence.  Adopted, 2015 WL 8773482 (W.D. Mich. Dec. 14, 2015).
  • Boyce v. Cycle Spectrum, Inc., ___ F. Supp.3d ___, 2015 WL 8273463 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 8, 2015) (New York) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted. Significant product sales insufficient. No physical presence.  No registration to do business.
  • Covanex, Inc., v. Duvvada, 2015 WL 8375211 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 8, 2015) (New York) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  A couple of in-state employees does “not even begin to approach” sufficiency.  a level enough for all-purpose jurisdiction, nor were there exceptional circumstances.  Jurisdictional discovery rejected.
  • Melaragni v. Sandals Resorts International, 2015 WL 8152123 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 8, 2015) (Pennsylvania) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  No physical presence, in-state solicitation, business, or agent for service of process.
  • Bavikatte v. Polar Latitudes, Inc., 2015 WL 8489997 (Mag. W.D. Tex. Dec. 8, 2015) (Texas) (non-product liability) Granting motions to dismiss.  Business dealings with in-state travel agents and in-state marketing and sales insufficient.
  • Beem v. Noble Group Ltd, 2015 WL 8781333 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 14, 2015) (New York) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  “Several hundred” in-state customer relationships falls “well short” of sufficient.
  • Kewlmetal Inc., v. Bike Builders Bible, Inc., 2015 WL 8758065 (D. Ariz. Dec. 15, 2015) (Arizona) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted in part and denied in part.  Regular product sales to in-state customers insufficient.  Defendant had no physical presence.  Specific jurisdiction established.
  • Priority Environmental Solutions, v. Stevens Co., 2015 WL 9274016 (E.D. Wis. Dec. 18, 2015) (Wisconsin) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Regular purchases from in-state sellers “nowhere near” sufficient.
  • Oliver v. Funai Corporation, Inc., 2015 WL 9304541 (D.N.J. Dec. 21, 2015) (New Jersey) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Funneling products through in-state distributor, and a few in-state employees insufficient.
  • Sioux Transportation, Inc. v. XPO Logistics, Inc., 2015 WL 9412930 (W.D. Ark. Dec. 22, 2015) (Arkansas) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Several-state offices and regular transportation contracts insufficient.
  • Dimitrov v. Nissan North America, Inc., 2015 WL 9304490 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 22, 2015) (Illinois) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss granted.  Defendant did not consent to jurisdiction by registering to do business.  In-state facilities insufficient.
  • Konica Minolta, Inc. v. ICR Co., 2015 WL 9308252 (D.N.J. Dec. 22, 2015) (New Jersey) (non-product liability). Motion to dismiss and transfer granted.  In-state product sales, lapsed registration to do business, and untargeted website insufficient.  No in-state physical presence.
  • Campbell v. Fast Retailing USA, Inc., 2015 WL 9302847 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 22, 2015) (Pennsylvania) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state facilities and business insufficient.  Alter ego not established. Jurisdictional discovery rejected.
  • Walker v. Regence Blue Cross Blue Shield, 2015 WL 9460143 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 23, 2015) (Texas) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  No in-state registration to do business or physical presence.  Non-retail dealings with in-state companies insufficient.
  • Cahaba Disaster Recovery, LLC v. DRC Emergency Services, LLC, 2015 WL 9489911 (N.D. Ala. Dec. 30, 2015) (Alabama) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  No in-state physical presence.  Alter ego not established.  Jurisdictional discovery denied.
  • Clasen v. National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners, Inc., 2015 WL 9489507 (Mag. E.D. Tex. Dec. 30, 2015) (Texas) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Grading tests given to in-state applicants and internet website insufficient.  No in-state physical presence or registered agent.
  • Novotech Pharma LLC v. Glycobiosciences, Inc., 2016 WL 54677 (D.N.J. Jan. 5, 2016) (New Jersey) (non-product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state FDA regulatory liaison, supplying product to in-state customer, and intent to supply product to other in-state customers insufficient.
  • Clark v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 2016 WL 67265 (S.D. Ill. Jan. 6, 2016) (Illinois) (product liability – non drug/device).  Multiple motions to dismiss granted.  None of moving asbestos defendants shown to be at home.
  • Bautista v. Trinidad Drilling Ltd, ___ S.W.3d ___, 2016 WL 144705 (Tex. App. Jan. 12, 2016) (Texas) (product liability – non drug/device).  Grant of motion to dismiss affirmed. Routine control over in-state subsidiary insufficient. Occasional in-state trips by employees, branch office with a few employees, and bank account insufficient.
  • Brady v. Southwest Airlines Co., 2016 WL 259692 (D. Nev. Jan. 20, 2016) (Nevada) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Stream-of-commerce in-state product sales insufficient. Jurisdictional discovery denied.
  • Barthomome v. Pfizer, Inc., 2016 WL 366795 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 29, 2016) (Missouri) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  In-state product marketing and regularly conducted in-state business insufficient.  Not exceptional case.
  • Collier v. Smith Kline Beecham, 2016 U.S. Dist. Lexis 8681 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 29, 2016) (Missouri) (prescription medical product liability).  Multiple misjoined actions severed and transferred to plaintiffs’ states of residence.  No general jurisdiction over defendant.
  • Brown v. BMW of North America, LLC, 2016 WL 427517 (D. Ind. Feb. 4, 2016) (Indiana) (product liability – non drug/device).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Activities of subsidiaries and stream-of-commerce in-state product sales through distributors insufficient.  No in-state physical presence.
  • Sarver v. Johnson & Johnson, 2016 WL 482994 (S.D.W. Va. Feb. 5, 2016) (New Jersey) (prescription medical product liability).  Motion to dismiss granted.  Distribution partnership for different product with in-state entity insufficient.
  • Brown v. Lockheed-Martin Corp., ___ F.3d ___, No. 14‐4083, slip op. (2d Cir. Feb. 18, 2016) (Connecticut) (product liability – non drug/device).  Grant of motion to dismiss affirmed.  In-state facilities, subsidiaries, revenue, and registration to do business insufficient in asbestos case.  Bauman not limited to non-US corporations. General jurisdiction not judged by “reasonableness factors.”  Registration to do business and appointment of agent for service of process does not constitute consent to general jurisdiction.  “Consent” in these circumstances is “a fiction.”  Registration statutes confer specific jurisdiction only.  The statute here will be construed narrowly to avoid conflict with Bauman’s constitutional analysis.  Interpreting state registration statutes, without more, as conferring general jurisdiction by consent would create the sort of “grasping” and “exorbitant” general jurisdiction that Bauman condemns.  Affirming 19 F. Supp.3d 390.